Francis de Tuem has a peculiar voice – a mix of
guttural and nasal tones that are not always associated with famous singers.
Personally, I thought it was a bit strange that he could be a singer when I
first heard some of his songs. But when one listens to his sharp political and
social critique one instantly realizes why he is such a runaway hit. Known for his
irreverently bold songs, Tuem also displays an acute sense of logical reasoning
while singing about Goan politics. Hence, one simply had to find out why his latest
tiatr Reporter, is a huge hit.
More than the plot, this tiatr derives most of its strength as a bold performance on stage
from the songs sung by Tuem. While the main plot revolves around a journalist
Anita, who acts as an ombudsman in a political setup that is riddled with
corruption and dishonesty, most of the songs tackle the recent political
controversies in Goa and the rest of India head-on such as the ‘ghar wapasi’
issue, or the attacks on Christian institutions, the ban on beef, and so on and
so forth. The political cantaram in tiatrs are
not simply forms of protests, but are also sincere pleas for a change in the
way things function in society. In this context, Tuem’s tiatr and the songs he sings in it are
no exception.
Though Tuem’s critique of Goan politics is
significantly different, there are areas where this critique displays problems.
I would like to discuss this with reference to some of his songs. First and
foremost, there is a precise and logical manner in which Tuem crafts his songs.
The first song that Tuem sang had a bit about the beef ban controversy. That Tuem
is no ordinary composer and singer of political songs was proven by his bold
reference to a seminal paper that Dr. B. R. Ambedkar
wrote on the beef-eating food habits of brahmins in the Vedic times. Such a
reference is reassuring as the intellectual stream from which Tuem relies on
for mounting a critique of Goan politics is based on a solid premise – one that
is firmly lodged within anti-caste struggles of South Asia.
Another important issue that was highlighted through
the songs was the controversy of ‘ghar wapasi’. Through
the ritual of ‘ghar wapasi’ Hindu-groups have sought to convert Christian,
Muslim, and Dalit groups to Hinduism. In his songs, Tuem makes two crucial
statements. The first is related to the manner in which the caste hierarchy
operates within Hindu temples, which has continued to exclude the so-called
‘lower-caste’ from equal access to temples. Hence, Tuem counter argues, that
assuming Christians (or other groups) convert back into Hinduism, what is the
guarantee that such ‘re-converts’ will be allowed equal access to Hindu temples?
The second important point that he makes in relation
to the ‘ghar wapasi’ episode is regarding the so-called ‘forced conversions’.
For those who have been reading and listening about the ‘ghar wapasi’
controversy over the last few months, one of the reasons cited in favor of
‘ghar wapasi’ was that all conversions to Christianity and Islam were ‘forced’,
thus justifying this so-called ‘homecoming’. But Tuem’s sensitive and critical
understanding of Goan history allows him to make a crucial distinction between
those who converted in the sixteenth- and seventeenth-centuries and the
Christians in Goa today. Tuem makes the
argument that while one of his ancestors had converted, all the generations down
the line cannot be termed as ‘converts’. This is true for a lot of Goan
Christians today. Though this seems to be a simple and common-sensical point,
it escapes so many of us in Goa and India – that today’s Catholics are
born into the religion and therefore cannot be termed as converts.
But the cherry on the cake came in the form of Tuem’s
bold assertion wherein he forcefully asserted that if he is a Christian today
it is solely due to his own wish and devotion. This, we can suggest is a
logical culmination for all those who recognize that all conversions were not
‘forced’ and that there is an element of caste that always plays a part in
conversion movements whether in Goa or elsewhere. While the many Hindu groups
were busy in trying to convince the nation that converts had no agency and mind
of their own, Tuem’s assertion allows us to see that this is not the case. In
fact, through this song Tuem can be said to create a language through which
minoritized groups can respond to attempts at appropriating their histories.
The sense that one gets from the songs and the plot
of Reporter is that individual
honesty and sincerity is projected as the panacea for all ills. Emphasis is
also placed on institutions like the media who act as whistleblowers and
guardians of the truth in a similar context. However, one needs to be a bit
circumspect about arguments and visions that place the onus and responsibility
of smooth and efficient functioning of politics and governance on a few
individuals and institutions. What this ultimately means is that power to
decide the fates of others have to be concentrated in the hands of a few, and
this indeed can be detrimental to democracy. But this is not how it is supposed
to be. Power needs to be shared as equitably as possible with all constituent
elements in a polity.
The faith and trust reposed in a few individuals and
institutions is a problem in Reporter,
and calls for careful re-thinking. That aside, while Tuem should rightly revel
in the success of his tiatr and his cantaram, it is also time to recognize
that the very structure and form of the Goan tiatr allows a certain empowerment of the Goan people. The
structure and form of the tiatr not
only allows space for political dissent, but in its core is highly politicized.
Hence, if articulated properly, tiatr and
its cantaram are effective forms of
sharp political and social commentary.
(First published in O Heraldo, dt: 8 July, 2015)
